There are stars, and then there are stars, you know? Even though Emma Stone's had a good few years and a REALLY good 2011, she hasn't had that defining role... yet. The one everyone remembers as equal parts incredible acting and indelibly her. I'm sure she's getting scripts, but she's usually a variation on a Sassy Quirky Truth Teller. My friend Lauren pointed out that it's unfair to say that Stone has the career "Lindsay Lohan could have had". It's also lazy. You think we don't realize you only think that because she has red hair? (Lainey: sorry, guilty.) We all suspect, I think, that she's capable of much more than anything even she's done so far.

But it hasn't happened yet. And maybe there were some people who thought she was just another dizzy redhead. Who didn't know until last night that she could do comedy bits with real precision, even when saddled with the albatross of Ben Stiller. Why do we still have Ben Stiller, by the way?

I thought she seemed subdued on the red carpet, but now I know why. She was saving up. I know they were doing a riff on the Hathaway/Franco thing, but she went beyond, nailed every beat in her over-the-top bit and committed utterly to her goal for the night: becoming the image of Julia Roberts (to invoke another redhead). She didn't half-ass it and she didn't look embarrassed. She belonged there. She's ready to take the throne, and last night she made sure everyone knew it.

The dress on the other hand, well, I didn't like it even before I remembered the facsimile of Nicole Kidman's from 2007 that it is. It was too much going on up top and it made her have to skin back her hair, both for clashing and streamlining purposes. It's interesting, though. Five Oscars apart, the former Balenciaga to last night's Giambattisti Valli, similar coloring, even the bow on the same side...

But I was all set to flesh this thesis out with "...and they're both tall, statuesque women" but IMDB says Emma Stone is 5'6"! I thought she was at least 5'9”. Is this weird to anybody else?